I remember when steam came out people absolutely lost their shit. They rallied against it hardcore because they wanted complete control and ownership of their games. The single image that sticks in my mind is an animated gif someone made of the steam logo, two connecting rods, cycling back and forth like one of those mechanical fucking machines, fucking a guy in the ass. It was the same kind of juvenile vitriol that is currently on display. Imagine those people had been successful, and they might have been. Steam is beloved by everyone and is a huge and important part of gaming today. And why couldn’t those people just have an open mind about it? Why couldn’t they see past their own noses?
Steam killed big half-life mods. Essentially, by keeping all the clients up-to-date (by force) with no way to go back, they forced all the clients past where they'd released the SDKs for...
Bordering on dysfunctional internally? Do you have any evidence to support that? Real evidence, so that we aren’t thrashing in a sea of conjecture, speculation and politics. People confidently predicted that twitter would grind to a halt a month or two ago… the rumor gained momentum and everyone was saying it. And it turned out to be nonsense. If people actually required a little evidence before believing things instead of playing make-believe like you then it would save people from looking really stupid and wasting their time with vapid rumors.
You believe that there will never be embedded tweets again because twitter is going to charge an unknown amount of money for their API? You have musk derangement syndrome dude
I’m looking forward to twitter. When they start hosting video in a serious way and also long documents that will be very interesting. I think it’s ironic because all the people defiantly switching to a decentralized platform are just making twitters success more inevitable by drawing attention to platforms that will fail regardless rather than one of twitters serious competitors. The real decentralized system has been in front of us the whole time: the market. Only nerds will ever use federated, decentralized systems, only nerds will ever accept the trade offs that come with them. Regular people don’t act on principle, especially on things they don’t know anything about. Centralized platforms like twitter will continue to dominate because huge numbers of people will use them and feed them with the breath of life.
Tell me how David letterman was wrong and I’ll tell you how you’re wrong. You got triggered by my comment and went through my post history. That’s pathetic
No, it doesn't. I asked you how Twitter with longer tweets and long-form video would be different from Facebook, which already has long posts and long-form video.
I am not watching your video as it would be a waste of my time, I have been extremely online since before the WWW existed. I did not get 'triggered' by your comment and have no interest in your post history, and have never interacted with you other that this one question above. You seem to be mixing me up with someone else, and/or imagine yourself to have psychic powers.
Under your logic, the internet never should have existed. In the video, bill gates says you can watch sports. Letterman says you can do that with television. Bill gates says you can watch it on demand. Letterman says you can do that with a tape recorder. And there isn’t really anything bill could say in that moment that letterman couldn’t have retorted. And you’re letterman and I’m bill. The answer is in the nuances and unfortunately it doesn’t sound very convincing. If Facebook offers longform video, why does everyone use YouTube? If they offer longform text then why does everyone use sub stack? The difference between Facebook and twitter is that Facebook sucks. Twitter has unfragmented leadership, bureaucratic agility, and a cleaner and more straightforward monetization scheme which will lead to vastly fewer bots and spam. It also doesn’t censor people for trivial bullshit. Overall it’s much more fit and will threaten not only Facebook but YouTube, substack and others.
This actually holds true. Email as a way to keep in touch is def not mainstream. Everyone uses Facebook, WhatsApp. Services that are much more streamlined and consumer oriented. And centralized… I think it demonstrates my point.
I’ve been a google maps user for ten years and I tried Apple Maps recently and it’s way, way better. Google maps has always had a million little problems that annoy the shit out of me. It will take you down a road that is totally inappropriate, one lane and hasn’t been maintained for decades.
They did an experiment that makes mice appear old and be old by every metric we know of. Frailty, organ degradation, everything. And they did this with a specific mechanism. This is literally the most important step in solving aging that has ever happened. There is a high probability that we have discovered the cause of aging. Nobody gives a shit? Was it even in the news? A post on the front page about teslas crashing has 2000 comments and there’s a few people in here and only to move the goalposts? What the hell is going on?
First time, eh? These articles appear twice a week on here.
We’ve made cured nearly all diseases in mice, including baldness, Covid, cancers, heart disease, and now have made them reverse aging and practically immortal.
Very few of those treatments have worked in humans and even fewer have made it into commercial viability.
I’ve been looking at these headlines for 13 years with science literacy. I’ve become jaded as well. But this is the real deal. The idea that epigenetic model of aging is different in mice than any other mammal is so off base that it’s not even worth considering. This is nothing like those experiments that show apricots reduce cancer by 2% in mice — highly subject to mouse physiology with negligible results. Whatever animal they apply this cleaving to will display the same results, namely accelerated aging by every metric… this is massive and groundbreaking. Anyone who has any biochemistry literacy should know that
> Whatever animal they apply this cleaving to will display the same results
That’s the kicker isn’t it. “will”, not “does”. As someone who is not in the field it’s hard for me to get excited before you can at least say they’ve reproduced it with another species
Why didn't that experiment start with real old mice? And reversed their age to young again? That could be more convincing that "reversing" ageing of artificially aged mice.
Because they haven’t reversed aging in this experiment and the partial reversal they did achieve was using tools that already exist. The point of the experiment was to prove that epigenetic information loss is the cause of aging. The next step is to figure out how to completely reverse epigenetic information loss.
Sounds theoretically possible. I mean it definitely happens at conception, and methylation happens at specific sites where it should, and not where it shouldn’t. So there should be a mechanism.
Even if it’s trickier than that, there are probably lots of ways to selectively restore the epigenetic information in specific patterns or specific sites that might help chip away at disease.
Cancer rates have exploded since 1970. I told this to someone and they arrogantly corrected me. But I just looked it up right there and they had confused death rates with cancer rates. Thanks be to god for smartphones.
Diabetes, obesity, cancer, depression rates all exploded in unison starting around 1970. Why does everyone ignore the massive implications of this? It means there’s something we’re doing that is killing millions of people but everyone brushes that aside and supports treatments rather than figuring out what happened in 1970 that is actually causing it.
There are a trillion pet theories but nobody wants to do research to figure out. Nobody advocates for this research. What the hell
This is already well-known and understood in science: cancer rates exploding is not because of an external force causing more cancer, but a sign that we addressed other things that kill you before you get cancer. And we also got far better at screening, including being able to identify benign tumors.
This sort of hyperbole- "killing millions", "trillion pet theories"- is needlessly alarmist.
It's one of those things were effects are so far ahead in time you don't really realise they're there until you're 60 and cancer kills you. And then it's "oh well, old people die" or "he had too many beers"
I was striving to be vegetarian for more than a decade (avoid red meat, low fat diet) because of the "science", before I started developing issues.
Good luck in finding research to back this up, the trend seems to be going all towards vegan highly processed food.
I was impressed when mainstream science recently reluctantly backtracked on animal fat and meat.
The USDA is still to update recommendations of course.
And obesity skyrocketed because nobody knew the difference between a fat person and a skinny person before 1970? We knew what cancer was before 1970. We certainly knew what diabetes was. The simple fact is that people started getting sicker in the 70s.
For a very long time people have been going to the doctor when they feel sick. Oliver Cromwell consulted with doctors and was convinced that he was very ill. Later on we understand that he had bipolar disorder. When people feel sick they consult doctors and have been doing this for hundreds of years. An illness like diabetes presents very specific symptoms and doctors have been aware of diabetes for a very long time. The same is true for many kinds of cancer. And even mental illnesses as I have pointed out were recognized as medical ailments by people for hundreds of years. It wasn’t that we suddenly started diagnosing these things.
Also, there are communities of people who do not develop heart disease or insulin resistance or depression or cancer. The common thread between every community like this is that they live outside of the modern world and do not eat modern foods. They live in an old way. This is well documented. Yet another insane data point that people somehow ignore. There are literally people out there who basically do not get cancer heart disease or diabetes and nobody seems to think it’s important to get to the bottom of this, people like you who leave snide comments and contribute nothing. A worthless parasite.
So there are communities that live in the old way and do not get any of these diseases. We see that these diseases exploded for us around 1970. It couldn’t be more obvious.
> An illness like diabetes presents very specific symptoms and doctors have been aware of diabetes for a very long time. The same is true for many kinds of cancer
You can have diabetes and high blood pressure and cancer and not have symptoms. That's why we screen for them. If you have symptoms, it is no longer screening, it's diagnosing. A lot more screening is happening now than before the 70s so we are obviously finding a lot more disease.
I'm not arguing against the fact that lifestyle and environment play a significant role in increasing cancer, but that doesn't change the fact that dramatically increased screening rates have contributed to dramatically increased disease diagnoses.
> There are literally people out there who basically do not get cancer heart disease or diabetes and nobody seems to think it’s important to get to the bottom of this
I think there is probably more research these days into causes of cancer than ever before.
> people like you who leave snide comments and contribute nothing. A worthless parasite.
I don’t buy it. Cancer that is screened eventually will present. It doesn’t change the amount of cancer that presents. Again, this changes survival but not diagnoses. People who abstain from living in the modern way almost never get cancer or diabetes. Is this because they aren’t being screened? The explosion doesn’t correlate to change in screening methodology. Yes, people who ignore the simple facts are parasites. Like with the recent breakthrough in epigenetic aging, for decades the theory of mutation based aging dominated despite the clear and simple fact that there was contradictory evidence. For decades we had to put up with the amyloid theory of Alzheimer’s even though the plain and simple fact was that there were people without Alzheimer’s who had plaques and there were people with Alzheimer’s who didn’t have plaques. The reason why billions of dollars were spent on the wrong solutions and the reason why millions of people have suffered and died prematurely for no good reason is people like you who glom onto whatever is the least painful thing to believe. Whatever liberates you the most from accountability. No, it’s not anything we are doing, it’s just data anomalies and we are totally helpless. The same doom worship that is responsible for every global warming advocate getting really glassy eyed and avoidant whenever you start to discuss actual solutions rather than just rave about how utterly screwed we are. People don’t want solutions they want to resign to their helplessness. So yeah you are part of the problem in my opinion. You just want to resign to the fact that cancer is totally beyond our ability to comprehend or do anything about it. And you ignore these insane data points that demand to be scrutinized and made sense of because it would interrupt your world view.
The documentary “sugar coated” details this period when the sugar industry got everyone believing excessive sugar was fine and fat wasn’t healthy. Leading to a wave of low-fat sugar-fortified food in the late 70s on. Obesity exploded in response and related outcomes.
Thank you for your comment.
I studied anthropology, an imperfect field, but one thing was obvious right away and it is that point you are making here.
Please keep telling people.
- the American Cancer Society didn't start promoting cervical cancer screening until the 1960s [1]
- mammography was first recommended officialy in 1976 [1]
Screening was just coming of age 50 years ago so it's no surprise we started to find something once we started looking for it.
Cancer is ultimately a numbers game & you roll the dice every single day. Life expectancy in the US today is ten years longer than it was in 1970. All those extra dice rolls add up. Ideally you could correct for this effect, but it’s not clear we know enough about how cancer risk accumulates over time to do this correctly.
Cancer rates for each age have exploded, not just total cancer rates. Cancer rates for cancers that were known and diagnosed well before 1970 have exploded.
Looks like they went from 400 to 500 then back to 450 since 1975. It's trending down.
And you'd need to correct for age distribution to make sure it's not just the population having older people and thus higher chance of cancer in a given year.
Could it be that people started living long enough to develop these problems, or that the problems were just previously undercounted? There are a lot of fairly boring theories that are more likely than anything extravagant.
In 2010 I felt at home on Reddit. I felt like a had an entire world to lose myself in. But now Reddit is hollow and glazed over with mindless political dogma and petty drama. Maybe I’m just getting older too and not really impressed by internet videos.
I remember r/no sleep being this incredible wellspring of enthusiasm and creativity. I remember people raving about Dr who. Can you imagine Dr who being on half the front page now? Reddit was such an important part of my life back then. I feel so lonely without that community. But for years Reddit was dead and I found a new home on HN. Sadly the same thing has happened here. I remember one day a while ago someone submitted a videogamedunkey video and it was sustained on the front page… on HN. That was the day that it truly sank in for me. And in the pst year I have felt so lonely because the internet is just dead…the average person on the sidewalk and the average person on the internet are now literally the same.
The internet isn’t novel anymore. Reddit hive mind isn’t novel anymore. I think the difference between then and now is that people used to upvote, submit and comment with true passion because everything was new and novel and people felt like it was worth the time and energy to take part in something exciting and new. But now it’s all very tired and people are sobered up. Only low effort interaction survives. The pathways of engagement have been well beaten and so everything seems to be the same. No comment is original. These forums have the same deterministic malaise as the rest of the world.
What can be done about this? I would say the only answer is to withdraw into your work and reading because nobody of quality really takes part in Internet forums anymore.
The UI shown in my blog post is now out of date (the new one is much better), but the group names are still the same and it gives a decent overview. You should be able to join urbit community and find people in there to start.
I've had this feeling for a while now as well. I still enjoy HN, and try to think of commenting and participation more as just talking to one person rather than trying to score points from the community. That's what eventually destroys these for us, everyone trying to win popularity contests.
At least in HN we still have some interesting people left.
SDL does pretty much only the parts you still need after choosing Vulkan or WebGPU (or OpenGL, or anything else); audio, windowing, input handling, etc.
The point is that those apis will be used in browsers and the browsers will become the new SDL. The browsers will handle sound and windowing and also sandboxing and networking.
